The role of complexity metrics in a multi-institutional dosimetry audit of VMAT

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the benefit of complexity metrics such as the modulation complexity score (MCS) and monitor units (MUs) in multi-institutional audits of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery.

METHODS: 39 VMAT treatment plans were analysed using MCS and MU. A virtual phantom planning exercise was planned and independently measured using the PTW Octavius(®) phantom and seven29(®) 2D array (PTW-Freiburg GmbH, Freiburg, Germany). MCS and MU were compared with the median gamma index pass rates (2%/2 and 3%/3 mm) and plan quality. The treatment planning systems (TPS) were grouped by VMAT modelling being specifically designed for the linear accelerator manufacturer's own treatment delivery system (Type 1) or independent of vendor for VMAT delivery (Type 2). Differences in plan complexity (MCS and MU) between TPS types were compared.

RESULTS: For Varian(®) linear accelerators (Varian(®) Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA), MCS and MU were significantly correlated with gamma pass rates. Type 2 TPS created poorer quality, more complex plans with significantly higher MUs and MCS than Type 1 TPS. Plan quality was significantly correlated with MU for Type 2 plans. A statistically significant correlation was observed between MU and MCS for all plans (R = -0.84, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MU and MCS have a role in assessing plan complexity in audits along with plan quality metrics. Plan complexity metrics give some indication of plan deliverability but should be analysed with plan quality.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Complexity metrics were investigated for a national rotational audit involving 34 institutions and they showed value. The metrics found that more complex plans were created for planning systems which were independent of vendor for VMAT delivery.

Delivering a Research-Enabled Multistakeholder Partnership for Enhanced Patient Care at a Population Level: The Northern Ireland Comprehensive Cancer Program

The last 20 years have seen significant advances in cancer care in Northern Ireland, leading to measureable improvements in patient outcomes. Crucial to this transformation has been an ethos that recognizes the primacy role of research in effecting heath care change. The authors' model of a cross-sectoral partnership that unites patients, scientists, health care professionals, hospital trusts, bioindustry, and government agencies can be truly transformative, empowering tripartite clinical-academic-industry efforts that have already yielded significant benefit and will continue to inform strategy and its implementation going forward.

Employing neo-Durkheimian institutional theory in crosscultural accounting research

Purpose
Neo-Durkheimian institutional theory, as developed by the anthropologist Mary Douglas, is proposed as a suitable theory base for undertaking cross-cultural accounting research. Her social theory provides a structure for examining within-country and cross-country actions and behaviours of different groups and communities. It avoids associating nations and cultures, instead contending any nation will comprise four different solidarities engaging in constant
dialogues. Further, it is a dynamic theory able to take account of cultural change.

Design/methodology/approach
The paper establishes a case for using neo-Durkheimian institutional theory in cross-cultural accounting research by specifying the key components of the theory and addressing common criticisms. To illustrate how the theory might be utilised in the domain of accounting and finance research, a comparative interpretation of the different experiences of financialization in Germany and the UK is provided drawing on Douglas’s grid-group schema.

Findings (mandatory)
Neo-Durkheimian institutional theory is deemed sufficiently capable of interpreting the
behaviours of different social groups and is not open to the same criticisms as Hofstede’s
work. Differences in Douglasian cultural dialogues in the post-1945 history of Germany and
the UK provide an explanation of the variations in the comparative experiences of
financialization.

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Despite an abundance of studies on hybridization and hybrid forms of organizing, scholarly work has failed to distinguish consistently between specific types of hybridity. As a consequence, the analytical category has become blurred and lacks conceptual clarity. Our paper discusses hybridity as the simultaneous appearance of institutional logics in organizational contexts, and differentiates the parallel co-existence of logics from transitional combinations (eventually leading to the replacement of a logic) and more robust combinations in the form of layering and blending. While blending refers to hybridity as an ‘amalgamate’ with original components that are no longer discernible, the notion of layering conceptualizes hybridity in a way that the various elements, or clusters thereof, are added on top of, or alongside, each other, similar to sediment layers in geology. We illustrate and substantiate such conceptual differentiation with an empirical study of the dynamics of public sector reform. In more detail, we examine the parliamentary discourse around two major reforms of the Austrian Federal Budget Law in 1986 and in 2007/2009 in order to trace administrative (reform) paradigms. Each of the three identified paradigms manifests a specific field-level logic with implications for the state and its administration: bureaucracy in Weberian-style Public Administration, market-capitalism in New Public Management, and democracy in New Public Governance. We find no indication of a parallel co-existence or transitional combination of logics, but hybridity in the form of robust combinations. We explore how new ideas fundamentally build on – and are made resonant with – the central bureaucratic logic in a way that suggests layering rather than blending. The conceptual findings presented in our article have implications for the literature on institutional analysis and institutional hybridity.

Education for global citizenship in Scotland: reciprocal partnership or politics of benevolence?

Links between schools in the United Kingdom and partner schools in developing countries are an increasingly popular approach to teaching global citizenship. This study addresses the limited empirical research to date on the influence of such links on pupils' learning and understanding. Following an overview of the curricular theme of global citizenship in the Scottish curriculum and in the context of a partnership between Scotland and Malawi, challenges and potential pitfalls of teaching global citizenship are illustrated by the voices of pupils at four schools. Data is analysed through the themes of knowledge and understanding, concerns about fairness, and giving and helping. We reflect on whether our study indicates the intended reciprocal partnership or a 'politics of benevolence'.